PLAN DE MERCADEO Descripción del Producto

In this section, summaries of the findings of the study are presented in accordance with the objectives of the study.

5.2.1 Utilization of field work in the teaching and learning of geography

The research objective sought to establish if teachers utilized field work in the teaching and learning of geography. The data collected on this objective revealed that 83% of the geography teachers did not make use of field study around their schools as opposed to 17% who used the teaching method. The former figure compared to the latter is above 50% which gives an impression that a majority of geography teachers do not use field study methods. The survey also revealed that 50% of geography teachers did not utilize field work as a class activity. On the same note, 74% of the learners confirmed not to have made any field study while 26% agreed to have made. The former figure compared to the latter is above 50% indicating that a majority of learners were not exposed to field study. All this happens ironically in a background where schools are beset in a rich geographical environment as confirmed to by 61% of students, 71% of heads of department and 88% of school principals. The observation

78

checklist further added evidence to this. This denoted the fact that fieldwork was less used as a method to integrate what was learnt in class with what existed in the field.

5.2.2 Perception of teachers on the use of field work

Having established the utilization of field work in teaching and learning geography, the researcher also sought to explore the perception of teachers on the use of field work in the teaching and learning of geography. Analysis of data from the study revealed that 100% and 67% of heads of department and teachers respectively were of the view that field work motivated learners. In another development, 100% of heads of department agreed that the use of field work resulted into improved performance in the subject mean score whereas 50% of geography teachers had the same notion. The data depicts teachers viewing use of field work from a positive perception as they indicate that it is indeed an academically profitable endeavor. Despite the fact, field work was not used expectantly.

5.2.3 Position of field work to other teaching methods in place

After establishing the teachers‟ views; the researcher intended to find out commonly used approaches by teachers in handling geography. The findings revealed that teachers used other approaches more often to pass knowledge and skills to the learners than field work. To confirm this, a “mean” was calculated from the students‟ views on the use of other approaches instead of field work. The results were interpreted on the Likert scale as “often” used. On the other hand, a frequency test was undertaken to determine whether geography teachers used other teaching methods in place of field work and 60% of them indicated that they favored other teaching methods. Again, a standard deviation measure was used to test the strength

79

of the “mean” on whether other approaches were used in favor of field work. The results as interpreted from Likert scale revealed “very often” and “sometimes” which meant other approaches were used in favor of field work. This depicted the fact that field study was not prioritized in the teaching and learning of geography in the sampled schools.

Similarly, a rank order scale of placement was also used to position the strategies from the highest preferred to the least depending on their frequent usage in class. Geography teachers ranked the use of field work position 8 out of 9 with a 4% frequency use. On the other hand, the heads of department positioned it, the same as 8 out of 9 with a 3% frequency use. This in itself shows how low opinionated field study was compared to other teaching methods in the sampled schools. Thus, other teaching methods were used to disseminate knowledge.

5.2.4 The factors hindering both teachers and learners from utilizing field work.

Having investigated how teachers utilized fieldwork in teaching geography, the researcher delved into establishing the factors hindering both teachers and learners from utilizing field work. The findings revealed that over three quarters of teachers and learners cited insufficient time as a main obstacle for failure to facilitate field work around schools. Quite significantly as well, negative attitude by geography teachers towards the school environment and a tight school program were to blame. This shows a state of unpreparedness and lack of prior planning by the geography teachers. The researcher views it as a deliberate effort by teachers not to utilize field work in the teaching and learning process. It is a considered view that learning the environment around school should not be pegged on time.

80

5.3 Implications of the Findings

The findings showed minimal exposure of learners to fieldwork as 74% of learners had not gone out for field study whereas 26% had gone out for field study. This certainly is an unfortunate scenario as it made it impossible for learners to relate what they covered in class to the outside world. At the same time, it left learners with abstract information and basically impracticable to solve field work related problems hence the deterioration in performance.

Sadly, an impression is given by both the HODs and geography teachers that utilization of field work leads to motivating learners and on the other hand improved performance in the subject with a 50% or above percentage response but little is done to take out learners for field work studies thus impacting negatively on performance.

In another development, the teachers were seen to use teaching strategies that were majorly didactic in nature as revealed for instance from the rank order scale of heads of department where demonstration 26%, lecture 20%, using visual aids 16%, dramatization 15% among others. These direct transmission methods according to the researcher were tailored effectively to enable students pass geography exams. Despite the approach, the learners performed dismally as seen in Table 1.3.

The findings revealed minimum interest by geography teachers in most schools to take learners out for fieldwork. Thus, 83% of teachers did not utilize field study while 17% had, as a result of that, denying learners the practical aspects whereby they were to learn and get local experiences from their school environment, consequently,

81

failing to bring reality into the classroom. This substantially affected performance as earlier on noted from this study.

Geography teachers were seen not to be planning for their work in order to accommodate field study in their teaching and learning process despite the fact that they knew the subject as having three periods per week.

Teachers were seen to have negative attitude towards utilizing field work. It is important that geography teachers see the subject to be bearing environmental content and thus any fears in studying the school‟s immediate environment is illogical as it impacted negatively on performance as the divisional results reveal.

Incidentally, in Kiminini Division schools, the study has established that fieldwork is almost a thing of the past. It is no surprise therefore to categorically state that fieldwork in this area of study has been relegated to memorabilia.